Contents
The supplier sends a sole close to your reference. Its shape looks usable, but the toe and sidewall differ from your sketch. Should you adapt the shoe or pay to develop a new sole?
Start with the requirement behind the difference. Use an existing option if its limits leave the product you need intact. Explore custom tooling when a specific, essential requirement remains unmet.
The next commitment may be a sample or a development quotation—not a full tool set.
Here, existing tooling means tooling already available to the proposed supplier; custom tooling means new tooling for an agreed design. Specify whether the proposal covers an outsole, midsole or complete bottom assembly.
Labels such as open mould or private mould do not establish availability, allowed changes or use rights.
Compare the two routes on the same basis
First name what the product cannot give up. Then ask the supplier for a specific existing candidate and a defined custom alternative. Compare both against the same shoe, size range and intended order.
| Compare | Existing-tooling proposal | Custom-tooling proposal |
|---|---|---|
| Product requirement | Which requirements does the named candidate meet? What compromise would you accept? | Which unmet requirement would the new design address? |
| Last and sizes | Which last/construction combination and sizes can be evaluated? | Which base size and further sizes are included in development and review? |
| Allowed changes | What can change within this proposal? What needs separate work? | Which components, design files and tool revisions are included? |
| Cost and timing | What will samples, changes and the order require? What affects delivery? | What is charged for design, tools, trial samples and revisions? Which milestones need approval? |
| Use of design and tools | Who may use the existing design? What branding or access limits apply? | What is agreed about ownership, permitted users, storage, maintenance and future transfer? |
An unanswered cell calls for clarification; it does not automatically rule out a route. Neither column assumes a lower price or shorter lead time.
Compare the quoted scope, unit-price basis and order conditions before drawing a conclusion. The quotation comparison guide can help align the figures.
Check the existing candidate before choosing it
A catalogue image is a starting point, not a sample approval. Request three things tied to the named candidate:
- What is available: its reference code, sizes, material options and the version the supplier can actually provide.
- What fits together: a proposed last, upper and bottom assembly to evaluate in a shoe sample. If the last is undecided, use the shoe-last input guide to frame the missing inputs.
- What can change: whether colour, branding or geometry can change within this tool, needs separate work or calls for another design. A logo insert or small tread-texture change may be possible for a separate charge; confirm the scope and price, since that is not the same as commissioning a complete custom tool set.
A sidewall difference may be a compromise the team can accept. A missing required size or unresolved combination needs another answer. Confirm supply terms, sample work and timing for this candidate; “existing” alone proves none of them. Ask about the tool’s condition and maintenance history, and review samples from different production batches for cosmetic variation.
Define the job of new tooling
Describe the essential requirement that the existing candidates cannot meet in one sentence. Then ask the supplier to make the development proposal concrete:
- Design scope: which sole component, sizes and design work are included?
- Review point: what can you inspect before toolmaking, and which trial sample will show the result in the shoe?
- Commercial scope: which tools, samples and revisions are charged, and what must you approve at each milestone?
A drawing, model sole and shoe sample answer different questions. DESMA, for example, describes using model soles to review design and fitting within its direct-soling development process. [1]
Ask which review stages your supplier can actually provide; DESMA's process is not a promise about other suppliers.
New geometry alone does not prove better comfort, grip or durability. Use the rubber-outsole guide to frame any performance question that matters to this shoe.
Keep tool payment separate from use rights. Agree in writing who owns the design and tools, who may use them, where they are stored and whether they can be transferred. Paying for tooling does not, by itself, settle exclusivity.
A tooling charge divided across hoped-for sales is only a budget scenario. It cannot confirm future orders or their terms.
Try the comparison on a sidewall change
Illustrative example—not a client project: a casual-shoe team likes an existing sole but wants a different sidewall detail. The candidate covers the intended sizes; its combination with the upper still needs a sample review.
If the detail is a preference: accept the visual compromise and request a sample of the exact combination the supplier proposes to produce. Confirm what version that sample will contain.
If the detail is essential: request an alternative design and a development quotation. Ask whether the change requires full new tooling or can be handled through a limited modification. A low initial tooling figure does not answer the product requirement.
The same difference can lead to a different next step. Its importance to the product—not the mere availability of a tool—drives the choice.
Ask for the next commitment
Send the supplier the gaps you could not fill in the comparison:
Please identify the existing sole you recommend, its sizes and the requirements it cannot meet. If you propose new tooling, state the design, tooling, sample and revision scope, the use arrangements, and what we must approve before the next stage.
Agree how new parts will be reviewed before authorising tools. DESMA's 2019 account describes testing moulds by making sample shoes before delivery. [2] Ask your supplier which trial is proposed, who reviews it and how corrections will be handled.
Next step: request an existing-platform sample when its compromises are acceptable and the combination is ready to evaluate. Request a custom-development proposal when an essential gap has a clear purpose.
Clarify the requirements first if neither route can yet be judged.
